Personality traits and work-related compulsive technology use: An organizational perspective
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61841/r6mn5d09Keywords:
Work-related compulsive technology use, , personality trait,, --firm performanceAbstract
The development of technology has led to the expansion of automatic and complex technology- usage behavior. As a result, individuals are likely to feel compelled to interact with the system, which is referred as a compulsive technology use. The current study attempts to find whether in organizational context employees who frequently engage in work-related compulsive technology use have common personality traits, while also investigates whether work-related compulsive technology use leads to positive firm performance. Data was originated from online survey conducted with 332 employees of 8 construction companies in the Middle East and then used in multiple hierarchical regression analysis. The findings reveal that among the personality factors, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Openness positively predict Task CTU, while Neuroticism is negatively related to it. Conversely, Consciousness does not have an influence on Task CTU. As an external variable, Computer Self- Efficacy positively and strongly predicts Task CTU. Finally, Task CTU is positively related to firm performance, but not employee performance. The other findings are discussed further.
Downloads
References
1. Achim, N., & Al Kassim, A. (2015). Computer usage: The impact of computer anxiety and computer self- efficacy. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 172, 701-708.
2. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (2000). Attitudes and the attitude-behavior Relation: Reasoned and automatic processes. European Review of Social Psychology, 11, 1–33.
3. Aladwani, A. M., & Almarzouq, M. (2016). Understanding compulsive social media use: The premise of complementing self-conceptions mismatch with technology. Computers in Human Behavior, 60, 575-581.
4. Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 10(3), 411-423.
5. Ang, C. (2017). Internet habit strength and online communication: Exploring gender differences. Computers in Human Behavior, 66, 1–6.
6. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman & Company.
7. Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance: A meta- analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44, 1–26.
8. Buil, I., Martinez, E., & Matute, J. (2018). Transformational leadership and employee performance: The role of identification, engagement and proactive personality. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 77, 64-75.
9. Carter, M., Clements, J. A., Thatcher, J., & George, J. (2011). Unraveling the “paradox of the active user”: Determinants of individuals' innovation with it-based work routines. AMCIS 2011 proceedings, paper 41.
10. Chan, T. K., Cheung, C. M., & Lee, Z. W. (2017). The state of online impulse-buying research: A literature analysis. Information & Management, 54(2), 204–217.
11. Ching-Ter Chang, Chang-Shu Tu, Jeyhun Hajiyev.(2019) "Integrating academic type of social media activity with perceived academic performance: A role of task-related and nontask- related compulsive Internet use", Computers & Education.
12. Chang, C.-T., Hajiyev, J., & Su, C.-R. (2017). Examining the students’ behavioral intention to use e-learning in Azerbaijan? The General Extended Technology Acceptance Model for E-learning approach. Computers & Education, 111, 128-143.
13. Clements, J. A., & Boyle, R. (2018). Compulsive technology use: Compulsive use of mobile applications. Computers in Human Behavior, 87, 34-48.
14. Clements, J. A., & Bush, A. A. (2011a). Habitual IS use and continuance. Proceedings of the southern association for information systems conference, Atlanta, GA, US.
15. Compeau, D., Higgins, C. A., & Huff, S. (1999). Social Cognitive Theory and individual reactions to computing technology: A longitudinal study. MIS Quarterly, 23(2), 145-158.
16. Compeau, D. R., & Higgins, C. A. (1995). Application of Social Cognitive Theory to Training for Computer Skills. Information Systems Research, 6(2), 118-143.
17. Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO personality inventory (NEO-PI-R) and the NEO five- factor inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.
18. Davis, R. A., Flett, G. L., & Besser, A. (2002). Validation of a new scale for measuring problematic Internet use: implications for pre-employment screening. CyberPsychology Behavior, 5, 331–345.
19. De Guinea, A. O., & Markus, M. L. (2009). Why break the habit of lifetime? Rethinking the roles of intention, habit, and emotion in continuing information technology use. MIS Quarterly, 33(4), 434-444.
20. Disterer, G., & Kleiner, C. (2013). BYOD Bring Your Own Device. Procedia Technology, 9, pp.43–53.
21. Fiorenza, P. (2014). Mobile Technology Forces Study of Bring Your Own Device. Public Manager, pp.12– 15.
22. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39-50.
23. Friedman, H. S., & Schustack, M. W. (2011). Personality: Classic theories and modern research (5th Ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
24. Goodall Jr., H.L., 1992. Empowerment, culture, and postmodern organizing: Deconstructing the Nordstrom employee handbook. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 5 (2), 25–30.
25. Jamaluddin, H., Ahmad, Z., Alias, M., & Simun, M. (2015). Personal Internet use: The use of personal mobile devices at the workplace. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 172, 495-502.
26. John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In L. A. Pervin, & O. P. John (Eds.). Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp. 102– 138). (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
27. Judge, T. A., Erez, A., Bono, J. E., & Thoresen, C. J. (2002). Are measures of self-esteem, neuroticism, locus of control, and generalized self-efficacy indicators of a common core construct? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 693–710.
28. Hadlington, L. (2017). Human factors in cybersecurity; examining the link between Internet addiction, impulsivity, attitudes towards cybersecurity, and risky cybersecurity behaviors. Heliyon, 3.
29. Hair, J. R., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data anlysis (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson-Prentice Hall.
30. Hallak, R., Assaker, G., O’Connor, P., & Lee, C. (2018). Firm performance in the upscale restaurant sector: The effects of resilience, creative self-efficacy, innovation and industry experience. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 40, 229-240.
31. Hinton, P. R., Brownlow, C., McMurray, I., & Cozens, B. (2004). SPSS explained. London, UK: Routledge.
32. Hsiao, K.-L., Shu, Y., & Huang, T.-C. (2017). Exploring the effect of compulsive social app usage on technostress and academic performance: Perspectives from personality traits. Telematics and Informatics, 34, 679-690.
33. Hughes, D. J., Rowe, M., Batey, M., & Lee, A. (2012). A tale of two sites: Twitter vs. Facebook and personality factors of social media use. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 561-569.
34. Klobas, J. E., McGill, T. J., Moghavvemi, S., & Paramanathan, T. (2018). Compulsive YouTube usage: A comparison of use motivation and personality effects. Computers in Human Behavior, 87, 129-139.
35. Koellinger, P. (2008). The relationship between technology, innovation, and firm performance – Empirical evidence from e-business in Europe. Research Policy, 37, 1317-1328.
36. Kurfali, M., Arifoğlu, A., Tokdemir, G., & Pacin, Y. (2017). Adoption of e-government services in Turkey. Computers in Human Behavior, 66, 168-178.
37. Kuss, D. J., Griffiths, M. D., & Binder, J. F. (2013). Internet addiction in students: Prevalence and risk factors. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 959-966.
38. Lee, Y-K., Chang, C-T., Lin, Y., & Cheng, Z-H. (2014). The dark side of smartphone usage: Psyhcological traits, compulsive behavior and technostress. Computers in Human Behavior, 31, 373-383.
39. Leephaijaroen, S. (2016). Effects of the big-five personality traits and organizational commitments on organizational citizenship behavior of support staff at Ubon Ratchathani Rajabhat University, Thailand. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences, 37, 104-111.
40. Martel, M. M., Markon, K., & Smith, G. T. (2016). Research Review: Multi‐informant integration in child and adolescent psychopathology diagnosis. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry.
41. McCrae, R. R. (2001). Trait psychology and culture: Exploring intercultural comparisons. Journal of Personality, 69, 819–846.
42. McDonald, J. D. (2008). Measuring personality constructs: The advantages and disadvantages of self-reports, informant reports and behavioral assessments. Enquire, 1(1), 1-18.
43. McIntyre, E., Wiener, K. K. K., & Saliba, A. J. (2015). Compulsive Internet use and relations between social connectedness, and introversion. Computers in Human Behavior, 48, 569–574.
44. Meerkerk, G.-J., Van Den Eijnden, R. J. J. M., Franken, I. H. A., & Garretsen, H. F. L. (2010). Is compulsive internet use related to sensitivity to reward and punishment, and impulsivity? Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 729-735.
45. Meerkerk, G.-J., Van Den Eijnden, R. J. J. M., Vermulst, A. A., & Garretsen, H. F. L. (2009). The compulsive internet use scale (CIUS): Some psychometric properties. Cyber Psychology and Behavior, 12 (1), 1–6.
46. O'Neil, T. D. (2017). Cyber wellness: A liberal studies course in higher education. Proceedings of the EDSIG conference, 2473.
47. Panda, A., & Jain, N. K. (2018). Compulsive smartphone usage and users’ ill-being among young Indians: Does personality matter? Telematics and Informatics, 35, 1355-1372.
48. Paulhaus, D. L., & Vazire, S. (2007). The self-report method. Handbook of research methods in personality psychology, 224-239.
49. Restubog, S. L. D., Garcia, P. R. J. M., Toledano, L. S., Amarnani, R. K., Tolentino, L. R., & Tang, R. L. (2011). Yielding to cyber temptation: Exploring the buffering role of self-control in the relationship between organizational justice and cyberloafing behavior in the workplace. Journal of Research in Personality, 45 (2), 247–251.
50. Robbins, S. P., & Judge, T. A. (2009). Organizational behavior (13th ed.). Upper Saddle, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
51. Runyan, R., Droge, C., & Swinney, J. (2008). Entrepreneurial orientation versus small business orientation: what are their relationships to firm performance? Journal of Small Business Management, 46 (4), 567–588.
52. Servidio, R. (2014). Exploring the effects of demographic factors, Internet usage and personality traits on Internet addiction in a sample of Italian university students. Computers in Human Behavior, 35, 85–92.
53. Small, G. (2009). Brain bootcamp, exercising your most important organ. Psychology Today.
54. Stajkovic, A. D., Bandura, A., Locke, E. A., Lee, Dongseop., & Sergent, K. (2018). Test of three conceptual models of influence of the big five personality traits and self-efficacy on academic performance: A meta- analytic path-analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 120, 238-245.
55. Turel, O., & Osatuyi, B. (2017). A peer-influence perspective on compulsive social networking site use: Trait mindfulness as a double-edged sword. Computers in Human Behavior, 77, 47-53.
56. Uebelacker, S., & Quiel, S. (2014). The Social Engineering Personality Framework. Workshop on Socio- Technical Aspects in Security and Trust, 24–30.
57. Vitak, J., Crouse, J., & LaRose, R. (2011). Personal Internet use at work: Understanding cyberslacking. Computers in Human Behavior, 27 (5), 1751–1759.
58. Wu, K., Lindsted, K. D., Tsai, S-Y., & Lee, J. W. (2008). Chinese NEO-PI-R in Middle Eastese adolescents, Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 656-667.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
